Legal and practical perspectives on victim/offender mediation in Austria and Germany

International Review of Victimology

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 305-332

  Kilchling, Michael ^a   Löschnig Gspandl, Marianne ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84997924489     PISSN: 02697580     EISSN: 20479433     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026975800000700406     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aertsen I., Peters T. (1998). Mediation for Reparation: the Victim's Perspective. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 6, 106–124.
2. Ashworth A. (1986). Punishment and Compensation: Victims, Offenders and the State. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 6, pp. 86–122.
3. Ashworth A. (1993). Victim Impact Statements and Sentencing. Criminal Law Review, pp. 498–509.
4. Bannenberg B. (1993). Wiedergutmachung und Strafrechtspraxis. Eine empirische Untersuchung von Täter-Opfer-Ausgleichsprojekten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Bonn.
5. Baurmann M.C., Schädler W. (1991). Victims of Reported Crime — Their Expectations, Needs, and Perspectives. In Victims and Criminal Justice (Kaiser G., et al, eds) Vol. 3, pp. 3–27. Edition iuscrim: Freiburg.
6. Boers K., Sessar K. (1991). Do People Really Want Punishment? On the Relationship between Acceptance of Restitution, Needs for Punishment, and Fear of Crime. In Developments in Crime and Crime Control Research (Sessar K., Kerner H.-J., eds) pp. 126–149. Springer; New York.
7. Böttcher R. (1994). Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich. Eine kritische Zwischenbilanz bisheriger Praxiserfahrungen und Forschungsergebnisse. Bewährungshilfe, 41, 45–57.
8. Braithwaite J. (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge.
9. Brienen M.E.I., Hoegen E.H. (1998). Information Systems for Victims of Crime: Results of a comparative Research. International Review of Victimology, 5, 163–188.
10. Davis R.C., Smith B.E. (1994). Victim Impact Statements and Victim Satisfaction: An Unfulfilled Promise? Journal of Criminal Justice, 22, 1–12.
11. Elias R. (1993). Victims Still. The Political Manipulation of Crime Victims. Sage Publications; Newbury Park.
12. Erez E. (1994). Victim Participation in Sentencing: And the Debate Goes On… International Review of Victimology, 3, 17–32.
13. Erez E., Roeger L. (1995). The Effect of Victim Impact Statements on Sentencing Outcomes and Dispositions: The Australian Experience. Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 363–375.
14. Erez E., Roeger L., Morgan F. (1997). Victim Harm, Impact Statements and Victim Satisfaction with Justice: An Australian Experience. International Review of Victimology, 5, 37–60.
15. Fattah E.A. (1991). From Crime Policy to Victim Policy. The Need for a Fundamental Policy change. Annales Internationales de Cril1linologie, 29, (1/2) 43–60.
16. Galaway B., Hudson J. Eds. (1996). Restorative Justice: International Perspectives. Monsey; NY/Amsterdam.
17. Hartmann A. (1995). Schlichten oder Richten. Der Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich und das (Jugend-)Strafrecht. München.
18. Hartmann A. (1996). Die Entwicklung des Täter-Opfer-Ausgleichs im Spiegel der ‘Bundesweiten TOA-Statistik’. DBH-Materialien No. 31. Deutsche Bewährungshilfe e.v.; Bonn-Bad Godesberg.
19. Hartmann A. (1997). Forschungskonzept der Bundesweiten TOA-Statistik. In Zehn Jahre Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich und Konfliktschlichtung (Hassemer E., Marks E., Meyer K., eds.) pp. 413–477. Bonn.
20. Hartmann A., Kilchling M. (1998). The Development of Victim/Offender Mediation in the German Juvenile Justice System from the Legal and Criminological Point of View. In Restorative Justice for Juveniles (Walgrave L., ed.) pp. 261–282. Leuven University Press; Leuven.
21. Hartmann A., Stroezel H. (1998). Die Bundesweite Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich-Statistik. In Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich in Deutschland (Federal Ministry of Justice, ed.) pp. 149–202. Forum Verlag Godesberg; Bonn.
22. Hassemer E., Hartmann A., Kuhn A. (1995). Bundesweite TOA-Statistik. TOA-Intern, 3, No. 5.
23. Kaisaer G. (1994). Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich nach dem SPD-Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Reform des strafrechtlichen Sanktionensystems. Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik, 27, 314–319.
24. Kilchling M. (1993). Viktimisierung und Sanktionseinstellung. Tatschwere und deren Einfluß auf das Sanktionsbedürfnis. In Kriminologische Forschung in den 90er Jahren — Criminological Research in the 1990″s (Kaiser G., Kury H., eds) pp. 105–165 (with an English summary). Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
25. Kilchling M. (1995). Opferinteressen und Strafverfolgung. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
26. Kilchling M. (1996). Aktuelle Perspektiven für Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich und Wiedergutmachung im Erwachsenenstrafrecht. Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht, 16, 309–317.
27. Kilchling M. (1997). New Developments in Victim/Offender Mediation and Victim Participation in two European Countries — Part 2: Germany. Global Journal on Crin1e and Criminal Law, 3, 33–59.
28. Kilchling M. (1998). Victim/Offender Mediation in Germany and Austria. Unpublished paper presented at the Youth Justice Seminar, the Law Society London, May 1998.
29. Kilchling M., Löschnig-Gspandl M. (1998). Evaluating Victim/Offender Mediation Dealing with Adult Offenders in Austria and Germany. In Research on Crime and Criminal Justice at the Max Planck Institute — Summaries (Albrecht H.-J., Kury H., eds.) pp. 95–97. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
30. Löschnig-Gspandl M. (1996). Die Wiedergutmachung im österreichischen Strafrecht. Verlag Österreich; Wien.
31. Löschnig-Gspandl M. (1997). New Developments in Victim/Offender Mediation and Victim Participation in two European Countries — Part 1: Austria. Global Journal on Crime and Criminal Law, 3, 7–32.
32. Löschnig-Gspandl M., Kilchling M. (1997). Victim/Offender Mediation and Victim Compensation in Austria and Germany — Stocktaking and Perspectives for Future Research. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 5, 58–78.
33. Löschnig-Gspandl M., Kilchling M. (1999). Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich und Wiedergutmachung im allgemeinen Strafrecht von Deutschland und Österreich — konzeptualisierung einer vergleichenden Implementations- und Evalustionsforschung. In Forschungen zu Kriminalität und Kriminalitätskontrolle am Max-Planck-Institut (Albrecht H.-J., Kury H., eds), pp., 243–290. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
34. Masters G. (1998). The importance of shame to restorative justice. In Restorative Justice for Juveniles (Walgrave L., ed.) pp. 123–136. Leuven University Press; Leuven.
35. Meier B.-D. (1998). Restorative Justice — ANew Paradigm in Criminal Law? European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 6, 125–139.
36. Müller-Dietz H. (1988). Schadenswiedergutmachung — ein kriminalrechtliches Konzept? In Kriminologische Forschung in den 80er Jahren (Kaiser G., et al, eds) pp. 961–982. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
37. Schneider H.J. (1979). Das Opfer und sein Täter — Partner itn Verbrechen. Kindler; München.
38. Schwarzenegger C. (1991). Opfermerkmale, Kriminalitätsbelastung und Anzeigeverhalten im Kanton Zürich: Resultate der Zürcher Opferbefragung. Schweizerische Zeitschrift fiir Strafrecht, 108, 63–91.
39. Sessar K. (1990). Tertiary Victimization: A Case of the Politically Abused Victim. In Criminal Justice, Restitution, and Reconciliation (Galalway B., Hudson J., eds) pp. 37–45. Criminal Justice Press; Monsey/New York.
40. Sessar K. (1992). Wiedergutmachen oder strafen. Einstellungen in der Bevölkerung und der Justiz. Centaurus; Pfaffenweiler.
41. Shapland J. (1984). Victims, the Criminal Justice System and Compensation. British Journal of Criminology, 24, 131–149.
42. Shapland J. (1989). Managing Victims and Offenders: Conflicts within the Criminal Justice System. In: Alternativen zur Strafjustiz und die Garantie individueller Rechte der Betroffenen. Participatory Models and Individual Rights (Jung H., ed.) pp. 115–123. Forum Verlag Godesberg; Bonn.
43. Shapland J., Wilmore J., Duff P. (1985). Victims in the Criminal Justice System. Gower Press; Aldershot.
44. Silverman E.N. (1997). United States of America. In Wiedergutmachung im Kriminalrecht — Reparation in Criminal Law (Eser A., Walther S., eds.) Vol. 2, pp. 1–153. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
45. Skogan W.G. (1993). The Various Meanings of Fear. In Fear of Crime and Criminal Victimization (Bilsky W., et al, eds) pp. 131–140. Enke; Stuttgart.
46. Umbreit M.S. (1989). The Meaning of Fairness to Victims in Victim Offender Mediation. Ann Arbor.
47. Umbreit M.S. (1994). Victim Meets Offender. The Impact of Restorative Justice and Mediation. Willow Tree Press; Monsey/New York.
48. van Dijk J.J.M. (1986). Victim Rights. A Right to Better Services or a Right to Active Participation? In Criminal Law in Action. An Overview of Current Issues in Western Societies (v. Dijk J.J.M., et al, eds.) pp. 351–373. Arnhem.
49. Voss M. (1991). Victim Expectations, Diversion, and Informal Settlement: Results of a Victim Survey. In Victims and Criminal Justice (Kaiser G., et al, eds.) Vol. 3, pp. 67–94. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.
50. Walgrave L., Aertsen I. (1996). Reintegrative Shaming and Restorative Justice. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 4, 67–85.
51. Walther S. (1996). Reparation and Criminal Justice: Can They Be Integrated? European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 4, 163–172.
52. Walther S. (1999). Was soll ‘Strafe’? Grundzüge eines zeitgemäßen Sanktionensystems. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft, 111, 123–143.
53. Walther S. (2000). Reparation in the German Criminal Justice System: What is, and What remains to be done. International Review on Victimology, 7, 265–280.
54. Wemmers J.A.M. (1995). Victims in the Dutch Criminal Justice System: The Effects of Treatment on Victims' Attitudes and Compliance. International Review of Victimology, 3, 323–341.
55. Wemmers J.A.M. (1996a). Victims in the Criminal Justice System. WODC /Kugler Publications; Amsterdam/New York.
56. Wemmers J.A.M. (1996b). Social Psychological Explanations of the ‘Fair Process Effect’, A testing of the Group Value Model. Zeitschrift fiir Rechtssoziologie, 17, 114–134.
57. Wright M. (1996). Justice for Victims and Offenders. A Restorative Response to Crime. Waterside Press; Winchester (2nd ed.).
58. Zedner L. (1996). England. In Wiedergutmachung im Kriminalrecht — Reparation in Criminal Law (Eser A., Walther S., eds.) Vol. 1, pp. 109–227. Edition iuscrim; Freiburg.